Martin v. State

57 So. 1032, 3 Ala. App. 186, 1912 Ala. App. LEXIS 418
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided February 8, 1912·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

WALKER, P. J.

Though the court properly gave the general affirmative charge in favor of the State, still it was a question for the jury whether the evidence showed beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty, and he was entitled to have the court give proper requested instructions bearing upon this question. The court was in error in refusing to give written charge 5, requested by the defendant.—Griffin v. State, 150 Ala. 49, 43 South. 187.

It is not deemed necessary to a proper disposition of the case on another trial to pass upon other rulings presented for review.

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Martin v. State, 57 So. 1032, 3 Ala. App. 186, 1912 Ala. App. LEXIS 418 (Ala. Ct. App. 1912).

57 So. 1032 (Martin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sanford v. State
75 So. 2d 109 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1954)
Rakestraw v. State
101 So. 181 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1924)
Spelce v. State
65 So. 199 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1914)